Some here are dreaming,they think a 450hp 3.0 twin turbo will have the same mpg of a 300hp 3.0 twin turbo engine.
The 480hp 3.8 twin turbo v6 gtr engine gets about 16/23 mpg.
The 444hp 5.0 NA V8 found in the Boss 302 17/26 mpg.

Lets get real.....

obviously if you drive it like you stole it, it will drink fuel......450hp costs money.

But.....IF you wanted to return good figures out of it.....it is not beyond the realms of possiblity to get close to figures for the N55.

The S65 V8 is based on the S85 V10. This engine is not shared with any other OEM production BMW model. Even the E39 M5 which had a 4.9 liter V8 (S62) was based on the M62 production V8 found in the 540i/740i/X5. N62 Valvetronic V8 production started after 2005 I believe.

So yeah the argument is made that the S65 is in essence an exclusive engine in the BMW realm and the first and last M3 V8

Just as the M3/M4 features a heavily reworked N55 it also carries over the latest M-DCT from the M5/M6 allbeit in a re-altered form in order to be more compatable with the M3/M4 so that quicker shifts suit the more performance orientated M3/M4. A manual will be available also.

The same package will feature on the X4M model but a manual transmission will not be available as there is no market for a manual M SAV.

The 1M was not a volume model as the M3 it was exclusive. ignore the fact that more M3 were sold than 1M because it did not matter the 1M was an exclusive option you either wanted or you didn't and 7,000 global customers wanted one.

The 1M promised everything that was expected of it and the lucky ones that got behind the wheel (including myself) still enjoy that overall character and that the car was an M and of course well received than it's nearest rival the Audi RS 3 which promised much but like all Audi's failed in the most important factors.

For those that say the car was not a true M. Have never got behind the wheel because myself and 7,000 others say differently.
FYI in most of BMW M's markets the M3 is even outsold by the X6M.

7,000 1M's were sold worldwide? That doesnt sound right, usually North America (USA&Canada) has 50-70% of the share of all M cars sold.
Only About 960 1M's were sold in North America.
I didn't realize there were that many N54's laying around that they needed to move.

7,000 1M's were sold worldwide? That doesnt sound right, usually North America (USA&Canada) has 50-70% of the share of all M cars sold.
Only About 960 1M's were sold in North America.
I didn't realize there were that many N54's laying around that they needed to move.

740 were sold in the US. More were sold in other markets as they had an extended run. The US was limited to 1 model year and ROW was two.

740 were sold in the US. More were sold in other markets as they had an extended run. The US was limited to 1 model year and ROW was two.

I was under the impression the 1M was in production for maybe 16 months total falling between 2 model year with the US limited to one model year (10 months).
with only 450 for the UK, 70 for South Africa etc., 7,000 in 16 months doesnt seem right.

Basically what I am saying, is that as long as you have a good base to start from, an amazing engine can be made from a run of the mill engine with some changes and tuning. The N54/55 have proven themselves as good blocks to make good power from, if BMW M wants to make a performance version of them they can definitely do it without an issue.

One other thing that using an existing engine to build on is, a lot the durability testing of the design is done by the drivers that are running these engines in their 335's, 135's, 535's, Z4's, 1M's, X3's, & X5's day in and day out!

Basically what I am saying, is that as long as you have a good base to start from, an amazing engine can be made from a run of the mill engine with some changes and tuning.

I agree with this, but if true, then why didn't BMW just make an "amazing engine" from the s65 and put it in the f80 M3 instead of a re-worked n55?
I would love to be privy to the decision making process which ultimately arrived at the n55.

It absolutely is not the Government(s) that are causing BMW to majorly change engine platforms in M cars. It is higher profit through much higher part commonality. Another poster here made that point and I have argued it extensively in other posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

The main reason because the decision was made for this engine are to get more (as much as possible!) profit out of every sold M3/M4. This firstly ruled out the great and unique but expensive to produce S65 ... not its low mpg rates. Thats the real truth !!! The rest is great BMW marketing !

And also according to all infos from inside the M-GmbH the N55 derivate engine was only chosen because off cost reasons and also its an fact that there exists also an better (turbo)alternative - prefered from most M-GmbH members and technicans ... an V6 BiTurbo derivate from the S63Tü - but the BMW AG ordered the M-GmbH to go with the cheaper and not with the better engine to increase the cars profitability further. Its quoted that the real difference between both turbo engines was below 1.000 Euro per unit. But BMW (the AG) decided that its better to increase the debit over this Euros and the cheaper but (slightly?) inferior engine is enough to make the new F8x better than its predecessors. But in my opinion this is the wrong decision because the M-Spirt is worth more than € 1.000 per car ... just for the future of the brand.

Its hard to know that the M3/M4 would have been an even better car as it will be ... only if the M-Spirit fraction (M-GmbH) had won over the cost reduction and profit maximization fraction (BMW AG) !!!

Great information. 1000 Euro is a huge savings per car. The only reason the savings is this large is because the volumes from the base are so enormous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhabs

It will be interesting.

As far as the "let's wait and see how it performs" argument . We already know what a 450 hp M3 that weighs 150-200 lbs less performs like ...

Good post. Recall my specific predictions for a slightly lighter M3 with 450 hp here in this thread.

IMHO, the KEY to the new M3 will be throttle response. If this key part of the car is nailed and turbo lag is more or less unnoticeable, the car will be a big winner. I certainly don't like the reduction in redline nor the worse sound, but I'll certainly be able to live with them. As has always been in the past the car WILL best all near competitors.

By the way just to qualify...

-I don't think the Z06 nor GT-R are really M3 competitors.
-I do think the existing 335i and 1M have too much turbo lag for an M car.

Most people arent bitchin about what the engine is based on, they want a high revving NA V8, period. There must be a reason the Ferrari italia comes with a high revvin NA V8 and not a twin turbo 6 capable of putting down the same power.

Most people arent bitchin about what the engine is based on, they want a high revving NA V8, period. There must be a reason the Ferrari italia comes with a high revvin NA V8 and not a twin turbo 6 capable of putting down the same power.

Aren't you talking for yourself? It's you that wants that.

Ferrari are following tradition, like Porsche still make a rear engined flat 6 911's. Odds on Ferrari bringing out a turbo V8 soon?....very favourable. In the 80's F1 was turbo charged and so too were the top Ferrari's (GTO and F40)

You could argue BMW going V8 was a departure from BMW tradition. BMW always 'did' inline engines, and every single 3 series and M3 had an inline.

Yes turbo is as much a step change as the S65, but that is to fend off the competition that have gone turbo.Turbo charging is the future, Formula 1 is going back to turbo and so too are just about every engine coming out of Europe. Sticking with NA would be a backward step.....NA is not cool.

BMW are just keeping up with the times, which wins over buyers.

The new M3 will be a great car, worthy of carrying the M3 badge. Anyone who is an M3 fan will recognise that.

Ferrari are following tradition, like Porsche still make a rear engined flat 6 911's. Odds on Ferrari bringing out a turbo V8 soon?....very favourable. In the 80's F1 was turbo charged and so too were the top Ferrari's (GTO and F40)

You could argue BMW going V8 was a departure from BMW tioradition. BMW always 'did' inline engines, and every single 3 series and M3 had an inline.

Yes turbo is as much a step change as the S65, but that is to fend off the competition that have gone turbo.Turbo charging is the future, Formula 1 is going back to turbo and so too are just about every engine coming out of Europe. Sticking with NA would be a backward step.....NA is not cool.

BMW are just keeping up with the times, which wins over buyers.

The new M3 will be a great car, worthy of carrying the M3 badge. Anyone who is an M3 fan will recognise that.

Well,how about a twin turbo V8? I doubt Ferrari,Lamborghini will replace their high revvin NA V8,V10,V12 with supercharged or turbocharged engines.

Most people arent bitchin about what the engine is based on, they want a high revving NA V8, period.

[USA] does not equal [the world]

Yeah, US is the country of the V8. Always has been. But BMW is made in Europe, and sold worldwide. And of the past 4 generations of M3, only one had a V8.
No need to pretend that a V8 belongs in an M3. It doesn't.

Yeah, US is the country of the V8. Always has been. But BMW is made in Europe, and sold worldwide. And of the past 4 generations of M3, only one had a V8.
No need to pretend that a V8 belongs in an M3. It doesn't.

agreed. the US auto companies have only recently begun to truly foray into true performance where their cars are fast around the corners, too.

BMW's true legacy may lie in N/A engines, but they, like any other profit driven company, must match their company's vision with the international automotive zeitgeist.

no matter what, i doubt they will disappoint us...especially with the 991 being so sweet...

Long term Ferrari are also going to go FI (most likely turbo) for some production sports cars. However, they are waiting until they have the engineering and technology to do something very novel and to be much less (if at all) affected by the typical turbo disadvantages of lower redlines and turbo lag. If the next M3 has an electric compressor they may beat Ferrari to the punch on that regard. That being said Ferrari have been able to substantially increase power, redline and fuel efficiency while maintaining their V8s and V12s. The major improvements are from direct injection. That would have been the only way to go if BMW M were to keep the V8 for the M3. It would have been a great solution but it simply did not offer them enough profit. I guess we should not be surprised the Ferrari place emotion and character of their engine above cost but BMW do the opposite. BMW is a changin'...

All of this inane discussion of the cylinder count or configuration (I vs. V) is entirely irrelevant. The I6 has its BMW and BMW M heritage but every generation of M engines have also enjoyed a higher redline and more specific output (power per liter) as well as improved shapes of the power and torque curves.

Again the things of consequence that actually matter are these same things, redline, turbo lag, power delivery characteristics.

Yeah, US is the country of the V8. Always has been. But BMW is made in Europe, and sold worldwide. And of the past 4 generations of M3, only one had a V8.
No need to pretend that a V8 belongs in an M3. It doesn't.

Maybe the italians will abandon their NA high revvin V8,V10,V12's for a twin turbo V6 based on a Fiat engine
And of the past 4 generations of M3's none had a turbocharged engine.No need to pretend that a turbocharged engine belongs in an M3,it doesnt.

I heard some people say that the F30 328i handles better than its 335i sibling,mainly because of the better weight distribution. So the shorter V8 would have transfered more weight toward the back.
The most successful M3 in sports racing has the shorter block 4,not the inline 6.

Now if BMW could make a N/A V8 that is on par with GM's pushrods or Ford's 5.0 liter, then I would all be in support of that approach. But the S65 isn't up to par with those engines, so we need to stop pretending.

What's wrong with displacement? Especially when it delivers more power, more torque, and better fuel economy as both of those engines do.

Nothing, but BMWs NA 5.0 remains far ahead of Fords despite being almost 10 years old. I've just never been impressed by the drivetrain of any NA Mustangs I've driven. Now the new GT500 (650) sounds like quite feat but I've no time behind the wheel of one.

Anyhow, I'd bet good money the raft of changes M have planned for the N55 will ensure it doesn't disappoint. The 4.4TT is just fantastic, reminds me of a big brother to my sold in 05 996TT but with (practically)no lag.